Sign In

All Things Star Trek — Page 150

Author
Time

Ugh. Stargate Universe. Except for those cool aliens with the translucent skin and glowing eyes, I found not one redeeming factor to that series.

“Happy Halloween, ladies!”

Author
Time
 (Edited)

DuracellEnergizer said:

TOS & DS9 managed to strike a balance between extremes. Why is it so hard for modern writers to do the same?

Because they are not fans of Trek. They do not understand why people would like DS9 because they never watched it. All they know is shows like The Walking Dead, Breaking Bad, or Game of Thrones are popular (apparently, though not liked by me), but they don’t understand why that doesn’t translate correctly to the Star Trek universe.

I also watched the new BSG from start to finish, and I didn’t like really it at all. I kept waiting for “Riker to grow a beard” but it never happened. If anything, my suspension of disbelief broke more and more concerning things like how what’s-his-name could be roaming the ship talking to someone who wasn’t there without raising concern; or how he built an Enemy Spy Detector and no one checked his work to ensure his reported results were legit.

TV’s Frink said:

chyron just put a big Ric pic in your sig and be done with it.

Author
Time

For all of Beyond’s story flaws, at least Simon Pegg is a fan.

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

chyron8472 said:
Because they are not fans of Trek. They do not understand why people would like DS9 because they never watched it.

The season’s arc was written by Bryan Fuller, who wrote for DS9 and VOY. (Fuller left production, but he’s still credited for the story on the first 3 episodes.) And there’s still plenty of fans working on Discovery. Kirsten Beyer wrote Voyager books before writing for it; Jonathan Frakes will supposedly direct an episode. And I’m sure most of the writers have seen lots of Trek.

Also, the idea that good Trek can only be made by fans of the old shows is silly. Bragga and Berman were not big fans of TOS and TNG is good. And Roberto Orci is a huge fan of TOS and I don’t think Into Darkness is very good or understands TOS very well. There is also plenty of room for a Star Trek show to be different from the hundreds of hours of existing Star Trek.

I liked the 3rd episode alright and I’m interested to see where it goes. The tone of it doesn’t really match with just 10 years before TOS, but this is more in the “responding to the present” mode of Star Trek, rather than then “socialist utopia” mode that TNG often did.

Star Trek: The Motion Picture - Director’s Edition HD Recreation
Duel (1971) - The Hybrid Cut
The Phantom of the Opera - 1925 Version Reconstruction - Rare Scores Collection

Author
Time

I wonder if Levar Burton will direct? I think he’s the only who’s directed episodes of all the spin-off series (excepting TAS). As for the fan-non-fan argument, well, Nicholas Meyer didn’t know the franchise before he came on and he made the two best films by a wide margin. So that’s not a huge issue, IMO. That said, Discovery definitely doesn’t feel like the swashbuckling original series or any of the “socialist utopia” of TNG. It doesn’t feel Trek-ish at all. I’m definitely reserving judgement until I see the whole arc played out though. TNG took almost two seasons before it really found its feet. I really want to like it. But in spite of the names attached-Meyer, Roddenberry Jr, Fuller-so far I haven’t been very impressed at all. I’m hoping that changes, I really am.

“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”

Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Meyer and producer Harve Bennett sat down and watched the entire series though. That’s how they got the idea to revisit Khan.

Nemesis director Stuart Baird didn’t know Trek either, and allegedly thought Geordi was an alien. Levar was supposed to have been upset about that.

JEDIT: Baird’s lack of Trek experience was worse than I thought, if this article is on the level.
http://www.denofgeek.com/us/movies/star-trek/248258/star-trek-nemesis-what-went-wrong

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

SilverWook said:

Meyer and producer Harve Bennett sat down and watched the entire series though. That’s how they got the idea to revisit Khan.

Bennett did, did Meyer? I didn’t know that.

Nemesis director Stuart Baird didn’t know Trek either, and allegedly thought Geordi was an alien. Levar was supposed to have been upset about that.

JEDIT: Baird’s lack of Trek experience was worse than I thought, if this article is on the level.
http://www.denofgeek.com/us/movies/star-trek/248258/star-trek-nemesis-what-went-wrong

Nemesis is pretty maligned by the fanbase, and Baird, right or wrong, takes a hell of the light of the blame. I’ve always kind of wondered what the rationale of hiring him was, especially given that Frakes was apparently chosen instead of some bigger-name directors, on the last two.

“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”

Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death

Author
Time

Mike O said:

SilverWook said:

Meyer and producer Harve Bennett sat down and watched the entire series though. That’s how they got the idea to revisit Khan.

Bennett did, did Meyer? I didn’t know that.

Maybe I’m not remembering it correctly, but Meyer made two well regarded Trek films and contributed to the screenplay of IV, so I think he versed himself in it more than Baird ever did.

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Mike O said:
I’ve always kind of wondered what the rationale of hiring him was, especially given that Frakes was chosen instead of some bigger-name directors, apparently on the last two.

I think he was brought in because Berman wanted to “liven things up” with an action director, and Baird was who he came up with.
I imagine this was probably in response to Insurrection, which feels cheaper and more like TV than the the first two films.
Does anyone know why that is? I know they didn’t go with ILM, so that’s why the effects work isn’t great, but Insurrection has the same director, cinematographer and a larger budget than First Contact but looks worse.

Star Trek: The Motion Picture - Director’s Edition HD Recreation
Duel (1971) - The Hybrid Cut
The Phantom of the Opera - 1925 Version Reconstruction - Rare Scores Collection

Author
Time

ElectricTriangle said:

Mike O said:
I’ve always kind of wondered what the rationale of hiring him was, especially given that Frakes was chosen instead of some bigger-name directors, apparently on the last two.

I think he was brought in because Berman wanted to “liven things up” with an action director, and Baird was who he came up with.
I imagine this was probably in response to Insurrection, which feels cheaper and more like TV than the the first two films.
Does anyone know why that is? I know they didn’t go with ILM, so that’s why the effects work isn’t great, but Insurrection has the same director, cinematographer and a larger budget than First Contact but looks worse.

Going the “human aliens” route probably didn’t help.

“Happy Halloween, ladies!”

Author
Time

SilverWook said:

Mike O said:

SilverWook said:

Meyer and producer Harve Bennett sat down and watched the entire series though. That’s how they got the idea to revisit Khan.

Bennett did, did Meyer? I didn’t know that.

Maybe I’m not remembering it correctly, but Meyer made two well regarded Trek films and contributed to the screenplay of IV, so I think he versed himself in it more than Baird ever did.

I seem to remember Meyer mentioning watching the series in the II director’s cut commentary track, but I could be wrong.

The Drink in Question

Author
Time
 (Edited)

DuracellEnergizer said:
Going the “human aliens” route probably didn’t help.

I’m not even talking about costuming, (although some of that is weird), but like:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdNbVxMNFvk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vm8sOhr-0lA
Ignoring the ship effects, these are both scenes of people bouncing around in ships. First Contact’s is shot, lit, and blocked much more dynamically. Insurrection has some nice stuff in it, but on the whole it has a much more conservative production design.
Even this scene, from the climax, lacks the gravitas of the First Contact stuff.
I don’t know anything about Hollywood budgets, did the ensemble cast’s salaries just eat into the budget more? (I assume they increase per film).

Star Trek: The Motion Picture - Director’s Edition HD Recreation
Duel (1971) - The Hybrid Cut
The Phantom of the Opera - 1925 Version Reconstruction - Rare Scores Collection

Author
Time

Insurrection just kinda felt like it was supposed to be a regular TV episode they decided to extend into a movie. I actually did enjoy it though. Not as much as some others but it was an entertaining movie.

Author
Time

I imagine the extensive location shoot added a bit more to the budget.

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

Finally’ve seen episode 3. Well, I would never expect that Burnham will turn into black Ripley and will recite Alice in Wonderland while being chased by Doom’s Pinky demon. I loved this episode, because it felt like it was written by Tommy Wisseau.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Okay, you’ve established it doesn’t take someone intimately familiar with Trek to make a good Trek.

But why then exactly is Orville good and Discovery horrible? Who exactly decided on all the grit and argumentativeness, and a lack of focus on adventure (whether than means exploring space or exploring our humanity)?

TV’s Frink said:

chyron just put a big Ric pic in your sig and be done with it.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Mike O said:

m_s0 said:

SilverWook said:

Perhaps we should make an Orville thread before the kvetching really starts?

I was referring to episode 3 of Discovery. Raw reaction, sorry if it wasn’t clear.

The Orville is flawed, but it has heart. Discovery is just… desperately, pointlessly contrarian, I guess? Also terribly written. And to think I thought the first two episodes were bad…

Yeah, episode 3 of Discovery, directed by Akiva Batman & Robin Goldsman, was not good. This dour, dark military sci-fi is like Battlestar Galactica, not Star Trek.

I went into watching episode 3 with low expectations since several of you say you hated it. I just now finished watching DSC episode 3, and… by the end, I liked it.

It is certainly not Trek Prime (and not just in style, but also for plot-related reasons). And yes, it does feel like dark military sci-fi. But it is starting to tell a good story, and I’m beginning to feel better about the show.

In part, Battlestar Galactica wasn’t just dark military sci-fi. It was risque. It was vulgar in it’s own made-up-words kind of way. It had drama seemingly for the sake of drama and not in a way that made the story believable. It was adult for reasons it didn’t need to be.

DSC is not Prime Trek, nor is is quite Kelvin either, but it is starting to be enjoyable for me.

JEDIT: Oh, and I like Captain Lorca (captain of Discovery). He does have an underlying sinister streak that Jason Isaacs brings outright to many other characters he plays (like Lucius Malfoy or Tavington from The Patriot), and he reminds me a bit of Captain Maxwell from TNG (O’Brien’s old captain from the episode “The Wounded”). It doesn’t bother me that Lorca isn’t like the Prime captains, as none of them are actually like each other really either. He has his own personality and command style. …and at least I can tell by his vocal inflections what his mood and intent is, unlike Captain Georgiou.

TV’s Frink said:

chyron just put a big Ric pic in your sig and be done with it.

Author
Time

Bingowings said:

Still loving STD 😆

Which do you think is better though mate, STD or STI?

😉

originaltrilogy.com Moderator

I find that answer vague and unconvincing. Why don’t you knock it off with them negative waves?
Why don’t you dig how beautiful it is out here? And say something righteous and hopeful for a change?

Author
Time

ElectricTriangle said:

Mike O said:
I’ve always kind of wondered what the rationale of hiring him was, especially given that Frakes was chosen instead of some bigger-name directors, apparently on the last two.

I think he was brought in because Berman wanted to “liven things up” with an action director, and Baird was who he came up with.
I imagine this was probably in response to Insurrection, which feels cheaper and more like TV than the the first two films.
Does anyone know why that is? I know they didn’t go with ILM, so that’s why the effects work isn’t great, but Insurrection has the same director, cinematographer and a larger budget than First Contact but looks worse.

Baird still seems like an odd choice, even given the action filmmakers at the time, a guy like John McTiernan probably would’ve been a better bet, though perhaps Baird simply came cheapest? As regards Insurrection, I have always kind of wondered that too. I don’t think it’s as terrible as many people say, but it’s essentially an extended episodes, and doesn’t look nearly as good as the cheaper First Contact, as you point out.

As far as the FX work, instead of ILM, didn’t they go with Digital Domain? Or was that on Nemesis? Because if they’re not exactly in the same league as ILM, they’re still a pretty top-tier company, aren’t they?

DuracellEnergizer said:

ElectricTriangle said:

Mike O said:
I’ve always kind of wondered what the rationale of hiring him was, especially given that Frakes was chosen instead of some bigger-name directors, apparently on the last two.

I think he was brought in because Berman wanted to “liven things up” with an action director, and Baird was who he came up with.
I imagine this was probably in response to Insurrection, which feels cheaper and more like TV than the the first two films.
Does anyone know why that is? I know they didn’t go with ILM, so that’s why the effects work isn’t great, but Insurrection has the same director, cinematographer and a larger budget than First Contact but looks worse.

Going the “human aliens” route probably didn’t help.

I don’t know, are they more complex than the Borg? The Borg looked like a makeup FX nightmare.

suspiciouscoffee said:

SilverWook said:

Mike O said:

SilverWook said:

Meyer and producer Harve Bennett sat down and watched the entire series though. That’s how they got the idea to revisit Khan.

Bennett did, did Meyer? I didn’t know that.

Maybe I’m not remembering it correctly, but Meyer made two well regarded Trek films and contributed to the screenplay of IV, so I think he versed himself in it more than Baird ever did.

I seem to remember Meyer mentioning watching the series in the II director’s cut commentary track, but I could be wrong.

You could certainly be right, it’s been a while since I watched it that way.

ElectricTriangle said:

DuracellEnergizer said:
Going the “human aliens” route probably didn’t help.

I’m not even talking about costuming, (although some of that is weird), but like:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdNbVxMNFvk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vm8sOhr-0lA
Ignoring the ship effects, these are both scenes of people bouncing around in ships. First Contact’s is shot, lit, and blocked much more dynamically. Insurrection has some nice stuff in it, but on the whole it has a much more conservative production design.
Even this scene, from the climax, lacks the gravitas of the First Contact stuff.
I don’t know anything about Hollywood budgets, did the ensemble cast’s salaries just eat into the budget more? (I assume they increase per film).

Particularly odd given that Frakes was actually LESS experienced as a feature-film director when he made First Contact.

SilverWook said:

I imagine the extensive location shoot added a bit more to the budget.

That’s an interesting point.

“What Orwell feared were those who would ban books. What Huxley feared was that there would be no reason to ban a book, for there would be no one who wanted to read one.”

Neil Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death

Author
Time

And again, episode 4 of The Orville was really good. It really feels like an actual Trek episode.

TV’s Frink said:

chyron just put a big Ric pic in your sig and be done with it.

Author
Time

Yup, Orville continues to impress while episode 3 of Discovery was even more sniping and general miserableness.

Help finish ROTJ: Revisited!

Author
Time

Yeah, ep 4 of orville was mostly very good.

I still feel like there is the odd mix. overall Orville has very nice trek plots, but then they tack the blob character and his oddness, and a few dick jokes, etc. if they can manage to drop the MacFarlane-esqness, this will be a good show. I am curious to see if the current balance of the writing stays the same, or if it changes (and if it changes, is it to be more Trek like or more MacFarlane like)